At what point is it acceptable to limit speech?

[mayorbrotherdan]

In my home town there is a small group of activists that have been trying to get people to boycott Israel. They have set up protests outside of grocery stores that cary Israeli made products. They have also protested outside of synagogues

Comments

[entropicflux]

i think if there's a group that protests outside of synagogues, they're probably anti-semites.

[mayorbrotherdan]

That is beside the point. I think you could make an argument in either direction depending on the message of the people involved. I don't, however, think you can make a blanket statement that assumes that all people that protest outside of synagogues are anti-semitic.

Do they have a right to speak their message publicly, even if they are anti-semites?

Does government have a right to curtail their ability to speak if congregants of synagogues are offended? Does government have a right to curtail their speech if congregants feel threatened? Can you make a blanket decision that all protests outside of synagogues equates to incitement to violence, and is therefore illegal?

Are there spheres where such a message is acceptable? Should they be able to publish and advertise their message in any medium that they want?

[entropicflux]

this is a subject i've been wrestling with for a long time. i lean toward the belief that certain forms of speech should be prohibited. my only issue is who's qualified to make that decision, and how can we trust them to be impartial.

[mayorbrotherdan]

What types of speech should be prohibited? Those that are distasteful? Those that are insulting? Those that are defaming?